Foreign policy choices
Israel, American cultural imperialism, American physical imperialism – those are three reasons our Middle Eastern adversaries often cite for their opposition to the U.S. Are all three excuses to cover up Islamic weakness?
Sure, Israel is a thorn in their side, but it shouldn’t be: If Middle Eastern governments worked together with entrepreneurial Israelis the whole region could prosper. The problem, though, is that Muslim governments traditionally accept Jews (and Christians) only if they are subservient. (See the scholarly research of historian Bat Ye’Or.) An independent Israel is a daily reminder of Muslim weakness.
Sure, American sexual mores – too much flesh displayed by day and adultery at night – also rub Muslim traditionalists the wrong way – but they could ignore life within “the Great Satan” if so many of their people did not find American culture appealing. That they are tantalized is another sign of weakness within a religion that does not acknowledge original sin.
Sure, European imperialists messed with the Middle East early in the 20th century – but the United States has liberated countries, not enslaved them. (Remember Colin Powell’s statement concerning US action in World Wars I and 2: We only took the ground needed to bury our dead.)
By saying all three of these are “excuses,” I don’t want to minimize the anger our enemies feel about Israel taking “their” land and America flaunting its freedom. But take away those complaints and we would still have to face the prospect of war, for the real reason for conflict is that the United States is rich and Muslim countries (although not their rulers) are poor.
Poor people normally have two choices. They can work hard so their children will have better lives. Or, they can overthrow their rulers and take their wealth (but even if it is spread out it doesn’t go very far). The second choice often becomes prime when leaders define covetousness as justice.
In response to such covetousness Americans have three choices. We can make ourselves poor so others won’t be jealous. We can ostentatiously kiss up to those who covet, giving awards with the goal of buying off the most militant. Or, we can do what we can to help other societies become rich themselves.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Special Student Discount for WORLD!








Click to Print
Include Comments










back to top11 Comments to “Foreign policy choices”
Odd to criticize American cultural imperialism.
We had Iraqi interpreters with us. We had a TV and DVD player. Did the “terps” want to watch older classic American films?
No, not at all.
They generally WANTED the car chases, the shoot-outs, the implied or actual nudity.
There is a huge disconnect in muslim culture. The religious elites issue edicts on this or that. It often clashes with the “lowest common denominator” aspect of our market-driven pop culture. Witness the Saudi and Iranian ill ease with cell phone cameras.
Report comment to moderator
Well, we shouldn’t makes ourselves poor, we certainly shouldn’t kiss up to those who covet, but it is the American way to help those in need. I believe we would do so in a heartbeat, if the Muslims gave up the violence.
There is one thing the religious elites can’t stop, and that’s technological progress which brings information. Sooner or later — probably later — there will be a revolution. I have to hope that even these people will get tired of living in misery and poverty.
Report comment to moderator
The Isreali question amongst Arab nations is far more complicated than latent Islamic anti-Semitism which for the record is better or at least no worse than Western Europe. At its origins, absentee landowning, rival arab conflicts and claims, colonial drawn borders were also involved. At this point the violence has become so ritualized to have lost much of its meaning and in many cases is barely any different than the tribal and clan rivalries which beset Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. Hopefully, in 50 years they will reach the same conclusion as the Irish – as in “now what is it we are fighting about?”
but the United States has liberated countries, not enslaved them.
I hardly think the Mexican-American and Spanish American War qualifies as wars of liberation, unless you equate annexation with liberation. America has operate in much the same way as most European countries – sometimes they were the good guys and sometimes they were the bad guys; the former more than the latter. However, in the middle east the problem has not been wars but support of despots such as the Saudi family.
To purport the conflict arose from disparity of wealth is very Marxists of you but not necessarily true. First many Arab countries are not poor and in many cases the people posses the same modern goods and conviences especially in the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia and to a certain extent Iran. Lebanon’s wealth has been drained by continious internal strife and its citizens know this are apt to blame themselves, Israel and Palestine. The poor states – Yemen and Egypt for example are as jealous of their rich Arab neighbours as they are of the West.
Although I have been known to spout off the share the wealth mantra, I also realize history, tribal politics and self interested rulers are far more important.
Report comment to moderator
There is one thing the religious elites can’t stop, and that’s technological progress which brings information
This could just as easily apply to America where you would be on the opposite side of the fence.
Report comment to moderator
“– but the United States has liberated countries, not enslaved them.”
this could be argued….
Report comment to moderator
This may well be the most asinine, blinkered, morally bankrupt post that’s ever appeared on WoW.
Report comment to moderator
What opposite side of the fence is the USA on?
JEALOUSY is a big factor, if not the ONLY ONE!
Our neighbors have a propensity for JEALOUSY, perhaps we should look OVER THE FENCE?
Report comment to moderator
There is no doubt that jealousy, disparity of wealth, and greed play into conflict at all levels, not only at the level of international relations. Heck, we even have this issue within my own extended family.
Helping another to become richer in all ways (especially spiritual) is greatly to be desired over helping them to become poorer. We all are poorer when we measure each other’s worth by the material only. I agree with theme of the post; making excuses for sin will never be a substitute for confronting it and acknowledging it. But that’s the problem isn’t it? Wealth follows confession of sin even if it isn’t always material wealth. (It is often, BTW IMHO.)
Night Train,
Your comments again reveal more about you than about the post. Please take a moment to think about what others say once and a while with the intention of building rather than just tearing down in a knee-jerk reaction. It’s just a waste of time and resources. Give others this courtesy and they might even be interested in what you have to say.
Report comment to moderator
Certainly, the politics of envy plays a roll in muslim and American attitudes.
“– but the United States has liberated countries, not enslaved them.”
This is an interesting statement under the post name “Foreign Policy choices.” What is slavery? The Bible constantly associates slavery with debt. Proverbs 22:7 states “Just as the rich rule the poor, so the borrower is servant to the lender.” The gospels point to our debt of sin being paid through Christ’s work; that we were slaves to sin made free through Christ. What has America’s policy choices done to the average American?
1. Accept that debt is preferred to savings
2. Accept a government in debt as the norm
3. cause them to spend 3 to 4 months of the year’s income on various taxes
So, will the real slaves stand up?
Report comment to moderator
nice post WIGLAF…the average american spends and owes money that doesn’e even exist!
and why wouldn’t such a domestic policy not be applicable to our foreign policy? people, we are a consumer nation whose policies are shaped by corrupt politicians (on both sides) who have given into lobbys who give them money to continue to allow the grab for resources and cheap labor. we enslave nations via development debt via corporate contractors via CIAID…er…USAID. they don’t have the GNP to pay us back, so we muscle in for UN votes, for military bases, for slave-labor factories.
look at darfur, look at rwanda, look at liberia…no US involvement. No money in it. the only time we do step in to take care of the husseins, the noriegas, the chavez’ (which failed btw) is not because they have done evil (which they had), but because they aren’t cooperating with US demand for cheaper oil and labor…THAT’s the only reason!! God and Country is just a facade for the wolves to operate.
“material jealousy” is a naive assessment…i would have agreed not too long ago.
Report comment to moderator
We could give up Arab oil. That would bring about change right quick.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!